At the White House website on February 21 there was posted the president's final offer to Boehner on deficit reduction.
A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit
In the middle of all the cuts that are listed is this sentence:
Spending savings from Superlative CPI with protections for vulnerable. 130 B
From what I have read Superlative CPI is either the president's version of Chained CPI or they are the very same. I have read both.
I have to wonder why the vulnerable need protecting? From what? If there are no cuts intended why is there a need for protection?
Jay Carney told us in December that President Obama included the chained cpi in the negotiations to find common ground with the Republicans. I find myself resenting that very much.
From the White House transcript in December:
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 12/18/2012
MR. CARNEY: Well, let’s be clear about one thing: The President didn’t put it on the table. This is something that Republicans want. And it is --
Q But the Republicans --
MR. CARNEY: -- part of his -- if I could please answer Sam’s question, I’d appreciate it. And the President did include it in his counterproposal, his counteroffer, as part of this process, as part of the negotiation process. I would note that this is a technical change -- would be if instated -- to the way that economists calculate inflation, and it would affect every program that has -- that uses the CPI in its calculations. And so it’s not directed at one particular program; it would affect every program that uses CPI. There are also -- as part of the President’s proposals, he would make sure that the most vulnerable were exempted out from this change.
But let’s be clear, this is something that the Republicans have asked for, and as part of an effort to find common ground with the Republicans, the President has agreed to put this in his proposal -- agreed to have this as part of a broad deficit reduction package that includes asking the wealthiest to pay more so that we can achieve the kind of revenue targets that are necessary for a balanced approach to deficit reduction.
Thom Hartmann had harsh words for the use of this CPI.
The pure cruelty of the chained cpi
If Obama goes along with a “chained CPI,” he will be the first Democratic President in the history of the Party to have actually cut Social Security. Even though it doesn’t do a thing – nothing! – to reduce the budget deficit. And, as we saw with Bill Clinton “reforming” welfare, once the Republicans can corner a Democratic president into shooting a Democratic Santa Claus, the Republicans can finish the job through the death of a thousand paper cuts over the next decade and in the states, and everybody just remembers that it was a Democratic President who started it.
Bernie Sanders also had words for the use of this method.
Chained CPI: An economic, moral disaster
The so-called “chained CPI” is Washington shorthand for one of the most-talked-about cuts favored by Republicans and some Democrats.
Unfortunately, few outside the Beltway understand its consequences. It is a devious and underhanded way to wage class warfare against working families.
Wall Street billionaires and other supporters claim that changing the consumer price index is a “minor tweak.” Tell that to the millions of senior citizens trying to survive on just $14,000 a year whose Social Security benefits would be cut overall by $112 billion during the next decade.
Average 65-year-olds would get $650 a year less in benefits when they turn 75 and see a $1,000 a year cut when they turn 85.
Bold Progressives quotes a recent poll from The Hill. It shows that most Americans do not want cuts from Medicare and Social Security.
Most Americans want to protect Social Security from cuts
In the poll, 62 percent of Republicans and 82 percent of Democrats opposed cutting Social Security and Medicare, while 49 percent of overall respondents said they favored cutting back on defense spending. Even among Republicans, 56 percent said they would oppose defense cuts while a larger 62 percent said they would oppose cuts to Social Security and Medicare.